A number of legal experts and environmental activists have taken a detour in their mission to challenge the newly revised mineral export ban by visiting the Indonesian Ombudsman.

The Civil Society Coalition for the Constitution and Natural Resources reported Energy and Mineral Resources Minister Ignasius Jonan to the Ombudsman for alleged maladministration because of his regulations No. 5/2017 and No. 6/2017 that further ease a mineral export ban for the next five years.

Those regulations were issued on Jan. 11, the day after the government issued the fourth revision of Government Regulation No. 23/2010 on the management of mineral and coal businesses, which allows miners to continue exporting copper concentrates, certain amounts of low-grade nickel ore and washed bauxite.

“Law No. 12/2011 mandates that the public has the right to propose substances to be considered in the making of laws and regulations. However, because those regulations were issued concurrently on the same day, people were denied such rights,” Tarumanagara University legal expert Ahmad Redi said before filing the report against Jonan at the Ombudsman’s office on Monday.

He represented the Civil Society Coalition, which consists of at least 20 institutions, including the Legal Aid Institute (LBH), Energy World Indonesia, the Mining Advocacy Network (Jatam) and the Indonesian Forum for the Environment (Walhi).

The coalition initially wanted to take the case to the Supreme Court this week. However, it has decided to gather more testimony from experts, while at the same time filing a case with the Ombudsman.

The Ombudsman normally takes about two weeks to conclude an investigation, the findings of which would be used by the coalition at the Supreme Court.

According to the prevailing law, the Ombudsman must cease an investigation once a trial has started at the Supreme Court.

“There is no specific deadline for the Supreme Court to process a case, so it’s possible that the trial for our case will begin in months or even years,” Ahmad went on. “If that happens, the Ombudsman can carry on until it produces results from its investigation.”

Indonesian Ombudsman member Ahmad Alamsyah Saragih said the issuance of such a relaxation policy could lead to public distrust as people had started to question the government’s policy-making capacity.

“If we really find maladministration in this case, we can send a recommendation to the government to annul the ministerial regulations. However, for the government regulation, we can only give suggestions for the government to revise it,” he said.

The Finance Ministry has projected that state revenues from mineral exports can reach US$3.12 billion within five years following the relaxation, with copper concentrate being the biggest contributor with $159.37 million in annual tax revenues.

On the other hand, it estimates that Indonesia can lose $9.2 billion in state revenues from the exports if the mineral ore export ban is fully implemented.

Ahmad argued that $9.2 billion would be the cost that the government had to bear to bring about a greater good in the future, including the development of smelters for the domestic processing industry and the preservation of the environment, which he said had been degraded because of massive mining activities.

Meanwhile, Firlie Ganinduto, the head of the standing committee for institutional relations and energy, oil and gas regulations at the Indonesian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kadin), said the relaxation policy would only make businesspeople more reluctant to invest.

“The policy will only lead to legal uncertainty. The government really needs to implement a consistent scheme instead of constantly changing the blueprint based on temporary conditions. Otherwise, it will be dangerous [for the business climate],” Firlie said.

Popular

Kadin urges stability after Constitutional Court ruling

Jokowi says transition to new government to begi

BCA loan disbursement surges 17.1 percent yoy in first quarter